For weddings, I would like a short tele zoom that is reasonable to handhold for periods of time - maybe even hanging around my neck while I shoot with another body. I had an 80-200/2.8 and found it too big and heavy. The A 70-210/4 is passable (certainly wouldn't want it any larger) and I need it to be a constant aperture at f4 or faster.
If the 50-135/2.8 is smaller than the 60-250/4, then it will be more likely for my use. -- Bruce Sunday, January 14, 2007, 9:16:53 PM, you wrote: GD> The DA*60-250/4 does not look like it will be ferociously larger than GD> the DA*50-135/2.8 ... GD> GD> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092102pentaxdastarlenses.asp GD> How about a DA*135/2 or DA*180/2.8, and a matched Pentax-DA Rear GD> Converter 2x-S? But then I tend to prefer primes ... :-) GD> Godfrey GD> On Jan 14, 2007, at 8:31 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> It will probably have to be it - but it is going to be a bit bigger >> for that zoom range. I'd like to see around 50-150/4 or so - constant >> aperture and high quality. I'll probably have to consider the >> DA*50-135/2.8 and/or the DA*60-250/4. >> >> We'll see what the prices are like. >> >> ME> I guess I missed that one in the roadmap. That actually >> ME> sounds like the missing lens in the lineup! Hmmmmm. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
